Justified killing

¨The taking of even one life is a momentous event.¨ (Bernardin, The Consistent Ethic of Life). The consistent ethic of life is founded on the belief that all life is sacred and worth protecting, while the reasons for capital punishment may seem similar-- retaliation for a life lost-- the death penalty directly goes against everything the consistent ethic of life teaches. As proven through these presentations, capital punishment cases are often inaccurate and biased, while the act of the Death Penalty has proven to be painful with many examples of botched executions. Not only is killing immoral, but how can we go through with these executions when evidence has shown the death penalty can be inefficient and some

If we examine some arguments presented from both sides, opponents of the capital punishment claim that executing someone is nothing more than an immoral, state-authorized killing which undervalues the human life and destroys our respect for our government which itself says that killing is wrong. But the supporters of the death penalty think that certain murderers

Murder, legalized or not, has always been and continues to be a controversial topic. Many people argue that murder is wrong because it denies someone the right to life, while some argue that if the situation calls for it, murder is acceptable. The best way to go about this argument is to first define the word murder. According to Cornell Law School, “Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought.” This means that acts of self-defense are not truly murder because the person has no intent to kill and is only protecting themselves. I believe that murder is wrong no matter what and there are no exceptions if there is any evil intent.

There are two major ideas as to why it is considered wrong to kill another person. The first is that by doing so you prevent that person from achieving or fulfilling their desires. In terms of the abortion debate this favours pro-choice, as foetuses don’t have desires, however that idea itself is flawed. Other groups of people that don’t have desires, such as people suffering depression, or the unconscious or sleeping person, it would still be considered wrong to kill. The other argument for why it is wrong to kill another person is the discontinuation account. This states that what makes killing wrong is discontinuing a life of value (Young, 1979). While the foetus may not yet have a life of value, it is considered that they will at one point, if allowed the

A man by the name of John Grisham once said, “Who exactly, gives us the right to kill? If killing is wrong, then why are we allowed to kill?” Do people kill because they feel guilty? Once the criminal kills or commits a crime, is it okay for them to be sentenced to the death penalty? The death penalty can be looked at in a variation of ways. However, is it moral or immoral?

With killing another you have their life in your hands. Such as last year when I came home to my dog laying on the ground suffering through pain. I didn’t know what to do, but we put we put her down because we didn’t want her to suffer anymore then she was. When we put her down, we knew we made the right decision and knowing that she is an a better place not in pain. Killing another is a justifiable act in the case of George and lennie, Hunting for sport, and also in Military ethics.

I think that there are times when killing is justified. If that were not so then we would never go to war or have a police department. I believe that the only justifiable reason for killing would be to protect either yourself our others. When we go to war we go to war to protect ourselves or others we do not go to war just to kill. When we had the revolutionary war we were standing up for ourselves against the English. When ww2 started we did not fight for either side until we were attacked and then it was justifiable because we were protecting ourselves.

Is it ever right to kill another human being? Does the circumstances make it even more or less right? Is it okay to kill someone because you are being mistreated, abused, feeling alone? Is it okay to kill someone who raped you? No matter the reasoning, that person is still no longer alive. Does killing ever become right? Never is it ok to kill someone. Taking a life is the ultimate error, and it will leave the average person with depression, guilt, anxiety, fear, and all other emotional distresses. Though it might be necessary to kill someone to protect oneself, it still isn't right. Thinking biologically, however, our instincts tell us to do anything we need in order to preserve our lives and the lives of our offspring. So in the heat of the moment it will seem fine, but later on it will come back to haunt. It's not in our hands to punish others, that's what the government is for, and, that's what prisons are for. Yes, they cost money, but they are there to house as many of society's wrongdoers as possible.

From a philosophical point of view, it is not moral to kill. No matter how one may put it; it is not okay to kill another person whether or not it is for revenge. How are government officials going to tell people not to kill other people- because not only because it is wrong but also because they will face the consequences- and kill criminals because they think that it is appropriate in certain situations. As Barzun said:” punishment for crime is a primitive idea rooted in revenge” (Barzun, 354). When a judge decides to give someone the death penalty, their decision is

Life is a precious thing. This is something that the majority of people can agree on. It’s for this reason that taking someone’s life is one of the most if not the most disgraceful of crimes. Murder is a crime deserving of the harshest punishment available at the hands of the criminal justice system. This brings us to one of the most debated upon issues of today. Is taking the life of one who has taken the life of others an acceptable punishment? When making your decision think about this question; Is the life of the murderer worth any less than the victim’s life? Is the death penalty in any form morally justifiable in today’s society? The underlying question would be is any kind of killing acceptable, regardless of what the motive behind it is. I personally don’t believe that it is an acceptable punishment no matter what the crime. I see it as becoming somewhat like the monsters that we strive to put behind bars.

Supporters of the death penalty often thinks that taking a life for a life is being instrumental in justice. However, several studies and research have shown that taking the life of another human being through capital punishment only continues a cycle of violence. Furthermore, other research has shown that flaws in our justice system has led to innocent being prosecuted, guilty being set free, and additional biases being present during death row cases. There is no arguing that crimes associated with the death penalty; such as premeditated murder, are inexcusable. However, if we are to agree that taking the life of another human being can be categorized as the upmost heinous of acts, how can we justify

Murder is always wrong, but killing is not always murder. There is never any good reason to murder another human being because the intention is only and always violent by

Killing in self-defense is an action that some citizens find to be arguing about the moral correctness. By looking into a few aspects of the laws, ethics, morals and the value of life. Society may become more educated on the subject. Also, what can we do to change or lower situations that self-defense is needed? The two major sides of this battle are, one the mindset that a self-defense killing is ethically wrong and should not be done. The other side is the people that feel they have a right to defend themselves or their families from an aggressor. What side of the argument is correct? This may not be that clear of a choice. Among those restrictions is the requirement in most jurisdictions that the individual claiming self-defense cannot have provoked the conflict. (Moore 1)

   The law of God is, "Thou Shalt Not Kill" (Bible 79 ), and every system of ethics and rules of our society echoes that law. For decades, state and federal leaders have struggled with opposing views of the death penalty. Many minds have endured this difficult question-Who says it is right to take another human's life because of an act that he/she committed?

Killing another person is always wrong, but in some situations it is justified. If a person is left for dead suffering with no chance of dying do you let him die slowly and painfully? Or do do you end the persons suffering as quickly and painlessly as possible. And if it's an option of ten people dying or one hundred then there is an obvious choice people would take. Another place killing is justified is if there is nothing you can do to stop a person from killing another person. Because who has more of a right to live somebody who was hellbent on trying to kill another person or somebody who was merely trying to protect himself. There are situations although there are few, that taking another person's life is acceptable.